The Royal Throne of Tuan Besar in the Restoration of Kubu Kingdom: A Nasab Fiqh Perspective

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Zaenuddin Hudi Prasojo, (Scopus ID: 36731458100; WoS ResearcherID: AAE-4432-2020) IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia

EDITORIAL BOARD

• Amporn Marddent, (Scopus ID: 56053673400; h-index: 2) Walailak University Thailand, Thailand

• Ahmad Sunawari Long, (Scopus ID: 55694934400, h-index: 6) Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Malaysia

• Afifi al-Akiti, (Scopus ID: 57215344071) Faculty of Theology and Religion, Oxford University, United Kingdom

• Yasien Mohamed, (Scopus ID: 51565191100; h-index: 2) University of the Western Cape, South Africa, South Africa

• Irwan Abdullah, (Scopus ID: 57204549651; WoS ResearcherID: AAF-1276-2020) Gajah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

• Zainal Abidin Bagir, (Scopus ID: 55228684200; h-index: 3) Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

• Kamaludeen Bin Mohamed Nasir, (Scopus ID: 23489919500; h-index: 7) Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

• Muhammed Sahrin, (Scopus ID: 57216433056) Universiti Islam Sultan Sharif Ali, Brunei Darussalam

• Hans-Christian Günther, Department of Classics Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Germany, Germany

• Giuseppina Strummiello, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy

• Mujiburrahman Mujiburrahman, (Scopus ID: 57203539725; h-index: 2) IAIN Antasari Banjarmasin, Indonesia INTERNATIONAL EDITORS

• Tomas Lindgren, (Scopus ID: 53564098900; h-index: 1) Umeå University, Sweden

• Florian Pohl, (Scopus ID: 14523132900; h-index: 1) Oxford College of Emory University, United States, Germany

• Minako Sakai, (Scopus ID: 55566307000, h-index: 5) Director of Social SciencesResearch Group, Australia

• Mohd Roslan Mohd Nor, (Scopus ID: 54793295000; h-index: 7) University of Malaya, Malaysia MANAGING EDITOR

Imron Muttaqin, (Scopus ID: 57363251600; Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN) Pontianak, West Borneo, Indonesia, Indonesia)

EDITORS

• Busro Busro, (Scopus Author ID: 57205022652) UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Indonesia

• Syamsul Kurniawan, (Scopus ID: 57209681679) IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia

• Faizal Amin, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia ASSISTANT EDITORS

• Segu Atio, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia

• Setia Purwadi, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia LANGUAGE ADVISOR

Jennifer H Lundt, Colgate University Scholar, New York, United States

Al-Albab

Volume 11 Number 1 June 2022

(5)

Al-Albab ISSN 0216-6143 (print) and ISSN: 2502-8340 (online) is an interdisciplinary journal published twice a year in print and online (e-journal) by the Pontianak State Institute of Islamic Studies, Pontianak. Our academic publication concern includes the studies of world religions of Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Chinese religions and other religions.

Interdisciplinary studies may include the studies of religion in the fields of anthropology, sociology, philosophy, psychology, education, cultural studies and other social sciences.

Since the journal is published twice a year, special issue would be made available for special condition. The regular issues include June and December editions each year. The journal publishes research-based articles in the area of religious studies. All prospective contributors from various background are welcome to contribute to the journal publication. Contributions in English should be typed single-space and contain minimum of 4.000 and maximum of 8.000 words. The citation should follow APA style with footnotes.

Editorial Office:

AL-ALBAB, Gedung Saifuddin Zuhri Pascasarjana IAIN Pontianak,

Jalan Letjend Suprapto No. 19, Pontianak Selatan Pontianak 78122, Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia.

Phone: (62-561) 734170 Fax: (62-561) 734170 ; Handphone/WA: +6281256738348

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: http://jurnaliainpontianak.or.id/index.php/alalbab

(6)

AL - ALBAB

VOLUME 10 NUMBER 1 (JUNE 2022) CONTENTS

1. Religion and Public Policy: Digital-Based Islamic Political Economy and Human Security on Covid-19 Handling

Sri Haryaningsih, Elyta ... 3 2. The Royal Throne of Tuan Besar in the Restoration of Kubu

Kingdom: A Nasab Fiqh Perspective

Abu Bakar ... 27 3. The Tuan Guru Tradition of Nahdlatul Wathan in Pesantren

Supratman Muslim, Suprapto, Jamaluddin ... 45 4. Religion and Diplomacy: The Dynamics of Indonesian-Afghanistan

Relations During President Joko Widodo Government

Fatimatuzzahro, Gonda Yumitro ... 63 5. Likang Telu: Cultural Basis for Muslim-Catholic Relations in Manggarai

Hironimus Bandur, Adison Adrianus Sihombing ... 81 6. Syncretism on Catholic Symbols in The Invulnerability Rituals in

West Borneo

Arius Arifman Halawa, Lukas Ahen, Cenderato ... 103 7. Religion, Lifestyle, and Identity Affirmation within Middle Class Malay

Muslims in Pontianak of West Borneo

Nur Hamzah, Sangkot Sirait, Zulkipli Lessy ... 121 8. Reorienting Ecological Paradigm for Harmonization of Humans and

Nature: A Christian Perspective

Johanna Silvana Talupun, Eklepinus Jefry Sopacuaperu ... 139

(7)

(8)

[ 27 ]

AL ALBAB: Volume 11 Number 1 June 2022 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v11i1.2182

THE ROYAL THRONE OF TUAN BESAR IN THE RESTORATION OF KUBU KINGDOM:

A NASAB FIQH PERSPECTIVE

Abu Bakar

Fakultas Syariah IAIN Pontianak Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

This study describes the unresolved problem of the fight for the throne in the restoration of the Kubu kingdom and reveals the underlying root causes. The description of the problem is based on historical accounts and continuous local mass media coverage related to the fight for the throne. The problem is placed in its Indonesian political context, namely Regional Autonomy Era which seeks to promote the preservation and development of local culture. Nasab fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence concerning lineage) is used as the perspective of the review. This study explains that the Kubu restoration was hindered by the fight for the throne because the nasab (lineage) requirements were used as the sole instrument. In turn, the lineage requirement has made the issues related to Kubu throne a pri- mordial fight among the king’s descendants. This sheds some light on the fact that the throne has high heirloom value or shared inheritance which is attached to material rights. These material rights are granted by regional autonomy which provides opportunities for the king to revive local cultural roles.

Keywords: Royal Throne of Tuan Besar; Kubu Kingdom Restoration; Region- al Autonomy Era; Nasab Fiqh.

INTRODUCTION

Kubu was one of the kingdoms in West Kalimantan that emerged at the end of the 18^th century AD led by a monarch who held the title of Tuan besar [literally means Grand Lord]. Information about the kingdom can be traced in historical accounts, both from local and the Dutch colonial sources (Dewall, 1862, pp. 138-141 and Al-Aydrus, 1932). The post-independence Kubu was declared part of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.

After that, because of the centralized system of the New Order, the kingdom was neglected, until its existence came to an end, not only the institution of the throne but also the building of the royal palace. The name Kubu, as a royal institution that helped build West Kalimantan in the past, once again came to people’s attention in the era of Regional Autonomy. The enactment of Law No.

(9)

[ 28 ]

22 of 1999 which started this era has provided space for the preservation and development of regional culture (Rasyid, 2005, pp. 3-25). The existence of the law was responded positively by the Kubu community who wished to revive their kingdom.

The earlier mentioned context gave birth to the idea of restoring the Kubu kingdom, not in the realm of politics and government needless to say.

Traditional leadership in the kingdom is needed to preserve long-neglected local values (Suara Pemred, 2015), because of its position as a cultural center for the community. The efforts to materialize this idea were getting stronger with the creation of a new district called Kubu Raya Regency in 2007 in the former kingdom’s territory. Restoration of kingdom in the era of regional autonomy is a common phenomenon in West Kalimantan. The names of the kingdoms in the past resurfaced in society, followed by the election of their king. In general, nasab (lineage) institution provides a solution in the election of traditional leaders, such as the Pontianak Sultanate with the coronation of Sultan Abu Bakar (Surat Kesepatan Bertiga [Agreement of Three Parties], 2002). Meanwhile, Kubu has not succeeded, because they are trapped in a fight for the throne that involves three parties. The lineage institution still failed to hold the election of a Tuan besar [Grand Lord] who would take the throne. As a result, the restoration of the kingdom until 2020 had yet to bear fruit.

The polemic among the descendants of the king on the right to the royal throne related to nasab institution occurred in many areas. In 2015, the Pontianak sultanate allegedly had similar fight for the throne. The same also occurred in the Surakarta Sultanate, which began in 2004. The royal throne was claimed by the two sons of King of Paku Buwono XII. In the Kasepuhan Palace, Cirebon, the same polemic emerged after the death of Sultan Sepuh XIV. Previously, the palace had been shaken by a series of fight for the throne between the descendants of the sultan, and it was not completely resolved until 2020. The Sultanate of Yogyakarta currently is also facing the same problem as to who should inherit the throne. The problem is related to the candidate for successor to Sri Sultan Hamengku Buwana to X who has not been accepted by the royal family. All these polemics are concerned with the issue of lineage.

The fight for the throne of Tuan Besat in the restoration of the Kubu Kingdom raises academic questions regarding the issues surrounding it. It is important to conduct research on the issues considering the same phenomenon is found in many areas, including in the kingdoms of Java. Several solutions have been offered, but none have not yielded results. Deliberations, formation of institutions, and inauguration only gave rise to new tensions. In this regard, the study of the restoration of the Kubu is necessary in the effort to shed

(10)

[ 29 ]

some light on the subject. The results are expected to contribute to academic knowledge about the issue of the fight for the throne.

Kubu in academic literature has not received much attention from researchers or writers. Bakar (2018) wrote a book entitled Al-Idroes Family and the Kubu Government which was a historical account about the Kubu kingdom. It is a literature study using both local and Dutch colonial sources. The book describes the founder, origin and establishment of the kingdom, as well as a description of the Kubu government in the past (Bakar, 2018, pp. 15-57).

Previously, Mahrus also conducted research on the development of Islam in the Kubu. His research was based on a literature study. The results revealed a number of media as channels for the development of Islam in the local Kubu community (Mahrus, 2012, pp. 77-91). In addition, there is a brief text of the history of the Kubu written by Djunaydi explaining a period of the leadership of Tuan Besar Kubu and his family (Djunaydi, 2001, pp. 3-11). Handwritten accounts about the Kubu kingdom were found in the community with almost the same theme.

The issue of the fight for the throne above has not received much attention from researchers. There was a study that sought to provide arguments for solving the problem, but it has yet to resolve the issue. The research was conducted by Nurcahyani et al., a research team from the Department of Culture and Tourism of the Pontianak Historical and Traditional Value Preservation Center in 2008 with the title “Syarif Hasan bin Zein Al Idrus”. This research sheds light on the position of Syarif Hasan in the post-Japanese occupation Kubu government (Nurcahyani, 2008, pp. 3-9). Some of these issues were discussed by Husin in 1977. He discussed them as a critique of Lontaan’s 1975 work entitled “Recollections of the Former Bestuurscommissie of the Kubu Kingdom: Stories and Discussions on the History of Customary Law and Customs of West Kalimantan (1975) Between Two Former Members of the Kubu Royal Assembly” (Husin, 1977, pp. 4-7). However, the problem of the fight for the Tuan besar throne in the restoration of the Kubu kingdom is still neglected by most researchers, except for the discussion of important figures.

RESTORATION OF THE KUBU KINGDOM IN THE ERA OF REGIONAL AUTONOMY

The Kubu kingdom stood for more than one and a half century. The kingdom ended as a result of the Japanese expansion into West Kalimantan. The Kubu royal family still filled the government posts in their former territory during the span of 1944-1950 with the status of a royal government. Kubu later became a self-governing area which marked its integration into the government of the

(11)

[ 30 ]

Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. Kubu in 1953, along with Landak and Mempawah, was merged into one administrative district of the Pontianak Regency. The policy of the central government immediately drowned the kingdom and the royal family in the midst of its people. They were replaced by the new government and bureaucracy.

Regional autonomy as a result of reforms in Indonesia gave rise to hope for the descendants of the Kubu king to revive the royal throne in the midst of traditional society. The lineage was found to be an institution that could gather those who had been dispersed from Kubu. They also used it to enthrone a potential Tuan besar who would play a cultural role. It was never granted by the Old and New Order Governments that view regions in Indonesia from the perspective of Jakarta as a centralized government.

Law No. 23 of 2014 has proven to provide an impetus for the region to revive its culture. The regional autonomy enacted by the law has made it possible for regions to manage their affairs in the context of development and community welfare in accordance with their regional characteristics. Specifically, regional autonomy provides opportunity and hope for the restoration efforts of the Kubu kingdom to achieve its goals, because restoration requires the preservation of local culture which is a regional typicality. It was also greenlighted by the Regent of Kubu Raya. He showed evidence of the local government’s attention by providing assistance for the construction and preservation of the Kubu royal site. The regional head’s statement demonstrated the government’s support for the revival of local culture (Pontianak Tribunews, 2017).

Replica of Kubu Palace in Kubu Village

(12)

[ 31 ]

Ibrahim, a descendant of the Kubu king, also initiated the restoration of the kingdom. The restoration of the Kubu kingdom, according to him, is an effort to bring back the royal institution into society. Its presence is expected to maintain and, at the same time, serve as a forum for the development of local culture as regional treasures. This is considered urgent because the preservation of the previous Kubu kingdom has long been neglected. The effort began with the excavation of the historical sites of the kingdom. Rafik in previous years had explored a number of historical places to find information regarding the Kubu palace. In the context of regional autonomy, the presence of the Kubu kingdom is seen as a center for the development of culture, arts, and tourism, so that it will contribute to the regional advancement, not being limited to the local economy (Infopublik, 2017). Previously, a replica of the palace had been erected in Kubu by the local government which involved the descendants of Tuan besar VIII. The palace replica does not seem to be supported by a concept of developing local culture. In addition, the building is not integrated with other infrastructure developments. As a result, the replica failed to play a cultural role. This incident seemed to be anticipated by Ibrahim who came up with a concept of a new palace replica in the district’s city center.

Regional Autonomy is expected to provide an opportunity to materialize their ideas. Thus, the kingdom from Ibrahim’s standpoint should serve as the government’s partner in local value-oriented development.

The same idea is shared by Abas, another descendant of Tuan besar. In his viewpoint, the restoration of the kingdom should be designed as an institution that maintains the traditional order of the Kubu people which is considered a support for peace in the community. Regional autonomy requires local wisdom for regional development. This can be materialized through the existence of Tuan Besar Kubu as he is considered to be a guardian of cultural and historical heritage that deserves attention in the regional development (Kompasiana, 2017). The effort began with the restoration of the kingdom. It was confirmed by the Regent of Kubu Raya, Rusman Ali. The Kubu kingdom is considered a cultural asset in its territory that should be developed to advance the region according to local characteristics (Suara Pemred Kalbar, 2017).

(13)

[ 32 ]

Traditional ceremony of Robok-Robok at Keraton Kertamulya of Tuan Besar Kubu VI in Teluk Pakedai, Kubu Raya Regency

The existence of a royal institution in the era of autonomy is recognized as having contributed to regional development, because the king could play cultural roles that accommodate local interests, from identity, wisdom, to socio- culture (Prabandani, 2011, pp. 29-33). Many cities in West Kalimantan have successfully explored their regional culture by placing the royal institution as the main actor. The revival of local identity based on the ties of primordialism in that context is present in the community. This phenomenon is marked by the revitalization of customs to be displayed in cultural celebrations (Budiman, 2012, pp. 4-10). It has been demonstrated by the king of Sanggau in Paradje ceremony. The presence of culture gives value to knowledge, religion, socio- economy, and politics. It is filled with traditional music, dance, local games, people’s markets, social identity and solidarity, and rituals (Diskominfo Sanggau, 2019). All of these features can be presented as a tourism event. The Paradje in West Kalimantan is a typical representation of Sanggau (Natsir, 2013, 6-20). This role seems to be expected to be played by the Kubu kingdom, which unfortunately has not been successful in its restoration. Traditional institutions such as the kingdom are among the things local governments should revive when play their cultural role. A local kingdom can contribute to the development of the region.

The failure in the restoration of the Kubu kingdom has had an impact on the government in reviving local culture. Government activities related to arts and culture aimed at building regional identity have lost their value, because they are only filled with participants from government agencies, regionally- owned enterprises, and private institutions. The series of activities serve

(14)

[ 33 ]

only as a formal celebration, so they have contribution to local development.

Zulfi and Ibrahim tried to fill the void by holding a robok-robok celebration in Kubu along with a number of other arts and cultural activities. Another event was created by Ibrahim highlighting the concept of customs and ethnic culture of the Kubu Raya community. They wanted to represent themselves as a symbol of the Kubu kingdom in an effort to make a name for themselves as the king and prince of Mangkubumi. At the same time, Syahril also held a celebration of arts and culture in Teluk Pakedai despite being poorly planned.

The restoration of the kingdom that presents traditional leadership in that context is expected to provide a solution to the problem, because its role in the cultural context provides legitimacy for activities in the region. On the other hand, the failure of restoration will hinder the revival of culture.

THE THRONE OF TUAN BESAR KUBU

Tuan besar is a title that is well known in the Malay culture, both in West Kalimantan and in Peninsular Malaysia. Historically, the term Tuan besar was commonly used as a designation for respected scholars from the Arabian Peninsula who became role models and figures of scientific references for people in a certain area. Tuan besar Muhammad ibn Zayn in the Terengganu Sultanate, for instance, was known as a royal scholar under Sultan Umar (Mohd., 2006, pp. 112). In Mempawah, Husin bin Ahmad was known in history as a tuan besar, who was an ulema (Islamic scholar) and became a reference for Muslims in West Kalimantan and the surrounding area (Bakar, 2020, p. 13). The term is often followed by the name of the region, and hence Tuan Besar Mempawah. In his area, a tuan besar is the highest scholar in religious matters, such as Muhammad ibn Zayn who occupied the position of Shaykhul Ulama. The term tuan besar first appeared in the middle of the 18^th until the beginning of the next century.

At first, Tuan Besar Kubu was a term for a scholar named Aidrus ibn Abdurrahman. He got the title after he succeeded in clearing the forest to establish a new state in 1769 AD which was later called Kubu. He was different from the other tuan besar who were mostly ulemas. The state was declared a kingdom in 1780. In colonial literature, there is no mentioning of Aidrus’

involvement in a political-government contract with the Dutch. This indicates that he reigned as a free king. He led the community assisted by a number of ministers. His reign was succeded by his eldest son, Muhammad. He used his father’s name, making the title of Tuan besar Kubu institutionalized as a king’s title (Bakar, 2018, pp. 10).

Tuan Besar Kubu in the next period became a crown institution. The title

(15)

[ 34 ]

holder declared himself to be the highest ruler in his territory because he was king. Culturally, Tuan besar is the title of a king who lives in the midst of the culture of his people. The title is found in Dutch colonial literature. Dewall (1862, p. 140) wrote that Aidrus was succeeded by his eldest son, Muhammad, followed by the use of the title of Tuan Besar Kubu. The same thing was written by Enthoven (1902, p. 877) when he made the chart of the Kubu kings in his book. The information is in line with the oral tradition of the history of the Kubu kings who were styled Tuan Besar. However, this title in government affairs was not written in full. In official royal documents, they had the title Tuan or Heer van Kubu and it was sometimes written as Seri Paduka Tuan Kubu. Presumably, it was related to the local king’s habit of referring to West Kalimantan residents as Tuan Besar Residen (Letter of Tuan Kubu VII, 1919 &

Land Register of the Kubu Kingdom, 1924). The King of Kubu formally seemed to avoid using the same title, because of his position in the administration of the Dutch East Indies.

Tuan Besar Kubu II was Muhammad, who reigned from 1789 to 1829 AD. After his death, the throne of the kingdom was passed on to his son, Abdurrahman, as Tuan Besar III. The next Tuan Besar was Ismail ibn Abdurrahman. He became the fourth king. At the beginning of his reign, the royal throne was in his uncle’s guardianship, because he was not yet an adult. After that, the reign of Tuan besar was succeeded by Hasan, Ismail’s brother, because the crown prince died in Sarawak. Meanwhile, Ismail’s other child, Zain, was still a child. Abbas bin Hasan became the sixth Tuan Besar to succeed his father.

However, the throne was not returned to Zain. He became the seventh Tuan Besar after Abas was brought down by the Dutch due to tax refusal. The Dutch administration at the time was the holder of the highest power which had the power to determine a Tuan Besar. In 1919 AD, Zain stepped down from his throne which left Kubu without a king. Abbas and Zain’s sons did not succeed the tuan besar throne. Two years later, Saleh, the son-in-law of Tuan besar V was crowned Tuan Besar VIII who ruled the kingdom until 1944 AD. He died at the hands of the Japanese invaders along with his son, Tuan Muda Ahmad, who would have been his successor (Bakar, 2018, pp. 50-56 ).

The Kubu Kingdom had a territory between the Punggur River and the Mayah River and its coastal area. It was recognized by the Dutch in 1823 as stated in the political contract between Tuan besar Kubu, Muhammad, and Commissioner Tobias. The area originally belonged to Sultan Ratu Simpang which was lated granted to Tuan besar Aidrus. Kubu in the north was bordered by the Pontianak Sultanate. In the south, it was bordered by the Simpang-Matan Kingdom.

Meanwhile, the Lida and Mendawai rivers serve as boundaries with Meliau.

(16)

[ 35 ]

The islands between the Punggur Besar River and Nuri Bay on the coast belonged to Kubu. In West Kalimantan, Kubu’s sovereignty was recognized by local kings from the start, so there were no border conflicts. There wre thousands of people including ethnic Malays, Bugis, Dayaks, and Chinese living inside this kingdom. Their settlements spread into three administrative areas, consisting of Kubu, Teluk Pakedai, and Padang Tikar. They became the people of the Kubu Kingdom under Tuan Besar (Bakar, 2018, pp. 40-41).

Tuan besar Kubu as a result of its history has become a throne whose institutional nature is dynamic, so it is difficult to find rules as an urgency to underlie the restoration. The urgency of the king’s son as the crown prince is not permanent in Kubu. It was closely related to the Dutch political policy in interfering in royal affairs. This problem re-emerged in the era of regional autonomy when the descendants of the kings wish to revive the royal throne.

They face each other with their kinship background to fight for the throne that can only be taken by one Tuan Besar Kubu.

FIGHT FOR THE THRONE FROM THE NASAB FIQH PERSPECTIVE In 2015, Rafik was inaugurated as the king of Kubu, but he was not a Tuan besar. The inauguration event was claimed to be the outcome of an islah (reconciliation) of the descendants of the founder of the kingdom. This was stated by the chairman of the Ashadi event committee in a number of local mass media, such as the Pontianak Tribune and Pemred. Previously, Zulfi received a mandate from Ismail ibn Hasan ibn Tuan besar Zain to hold the election, appointment, inauguration, and at the same time the coronation of the king. Through this mandate, Rafik was appointed king (Antaranews, 2015.

His appointment was made in order to fill a leadership vacuum. Therefore, he was given the title of Pangeran Mangku Negara (Prince of Mangkunegara) of the Kubu kingdom. His dis not stay long on the throne and was brought down from the position of king.

The coronation of Rafik as king by the descendants of Tuan besar Zain immediately faced rejection that started an open fight for the throne among the king’s descendants. The first rejection came from Tuan Besar Abas’

lineage group. This was represented by Ahyar ibn Alwi through his statement at the Pontianak Post Daily Newspaper. He considered Rafik’s coronation a unilateral act that did not represent the entire heirs to the royal throne. Rafik was considered unfit to be crowned as king. Ahyar’s group unanimously rejected him.

Another rejection came from the descendants of Tuan besar Saleh, represented

(17)

[ 36 ]

by Djunaidy. He considered Rafik’s coronation a violation of royal customs, because he was not a descendant of the last king. At the same time, he considered that Tuan besar Zain’s group had no right to carry out the coronation of the king, because the heir to the Kubu throne is a descendant of the last king.

Basically, Rafik was an illegitimate king. Djunaidy, with regard to his rejection, was not a member of Ahyar’s group. He and his group belong to another camp (Djunaydi, 2015, p. 2).

In the following year, Ismail ibn Hasan ibn Tuan besar Zain was inaugurated as Tuan Besar X, on 27 August 2017 to be precise. The inauguration was based on the claim that his father was Tuan Besar IX. The claim was of course rejected by other groups. Ismail’s inauguration ceremony was held in the area of the former kingdom. The venue was selected to provide historical and cultural legitimacy. In the local mass media, it was reported that the event would be held on a large scale by involving thousands of invited guests, both domestically and abroad, such as Malaysia and Brunei Darussalam. In addition, there was an inauguration ceremony for a Kubu king, named Zulfi, who replaced Rafik (Suara Pemred Kalbar, 2017).

The above series of events were previously known to the group of Tuan Besar Abas’ descendants. They immediately planned a rival event to be held earlier.

At the event, Syahril was appointed Tuan besar Kubu on August 26, 2017. He was crowned in Kertamulia by the Panembahan [respected members of the king’s court] of the Kubu Palace. The coronation was the result of the agreement of the Supreme Council of the Royal Assembly regarding the coronation of Syahril. The event was reportedly held lively by involving thousands of guests with the accompaniment of tambourine music and a marching band. Also present were the Regent of Kubu Raya and the ranks of the local government (Kompasiana, 2017 & Pontianak Tribunnews, 2017).

The descendants of Tuan besar Saleh simply let the other two groups to compete. They already have Djunaidy. He is considered to have been elected and appointed at the Grand Meeting forum at the Pontianak Peace Agreement Complex attended by the descendants of the Kubu king, which took place in 2008 (Kamaruzzaman’s Statement Letter, 2008). At the same time, he obtained academic legitimacy from research results from the Department of Culture and Tourism, the Pontianak Historical and Traditional Value Preservation Center and the Research Observation Institute for the Indonesian Kratons [palaces], chaired by Kanjeng Pangeran Haryo Gunarso G. Kusumodiningrat. This implies that his great-grandfather was the Tuan Besar of the last Kubu king, so that the heir to the throne is in his hands. He, as a master, has at least obtained recognition from the Indonesian Palaces (Invitation to the Indonesian Palaces

(18)

[ 37 ]

Gathering Forum, 2008). Therefore, Djunaidy did not build a support base in the community. He had no support groups. Meanwhile, other groups had royal attributes and escort troops. He did not develop symbols or ceremonies as a Tuan besar.

The fight for the throne above is triggered by the application of nasab fiqh as an instrument for selecting a Tuan besar. This can be seen in Zulfi’s outlook in the Pontianak Tribune. He stated that he had selected the descendants of the Kubu lineage in order to enthrone a king. The same thought was developed by the Tuan Besar Abas’ group. They argued that the appointed tuan besar must be a descendant of the tuan besar lineage. This lineage must be understood in relation to traditional leadership theory. The theory is built based on customary norms in society (Soekanto, 200, p. 324). Leadership will be accepted by the community when it has legal legitimacy that was also applied in the past. The nasab fiqh as an institution that lives among the descendants of the founders of the Kubu kingdom should be used as a basis that underlies the law for the election of a tuan besar. The traditional leadership of a tuan besar without royal lineage is considered to be losing its value.

Lineage in traditional leadership is recognized as important in the history of Muslim empires in many areas, because it provides the legitimacy of fiqh laws. In that tradition, the lineage of rulers is often associated with previous great leaders. The founder of the Sultanate of Sambas, Raden Sulaiman, in consolidating his new power in Lubuk Madung linked his lineage with the Sultan of Brunei (Risa, 2014, pp 108-110). The same is true for the Mempawah Kingdom. Panembahan Adiwijaya ibn Daeng Manambon who founded a new kingdom in Kuala Mempawah linked his lineage to the Muslim king of Luwu in Sulawesi (Ema, 2008, p. 18). The king of Tanjungpura in its history displays the mythological story of Princess Junjung Buih and a prince who had lineage to the king of Majapahit. Their descendants were the kings of Tanjungpura to the sultan of Matan.

The nasab fiqh in Kubu with respect to the restoration of the kingdom is required to have continuity from generation to generation to the king. The truth of the lineage must be verified in the community. The descendants of the Kubu king have a large family genealogy which is published together with the genealogy of Sultan Usman Pontianak (Sultan Usman’s family Tree, 1969).

In addition, his lineage is not flawed according to fiqh, for example due to adultery of parents and the presence of an oath as proof. By law, the nasab (lineage) requirement is based on religion. Al-Sya`rawi defines the term nasab in al-Furqan verse 54 as attachment of something below to something above it, so that we can say so-and-so son of so-and-so. (Sya`rāwi, 1991, p. 1471).

(19)

[ 38 ]

Nasab fiqh ensures the legal status of a child concerning his/her biological father which has implications for a number of rights. The royal throne as a king’s right in that respect can be given to his descendants. Basically, the importance of lineage has a legal basis in the succession of kings.

A prospective tuan besar shall be a male descendant of the Kubu king. It has precedents in the history of Kubu. Halid in Cerita Negeri Kubu [Chronicle of the Kubu State] reported that Abdurrahman as the third Tuan Besar Kubu was crowned after receiving the delegation of power from his relative who was born as a daughter of the queen. Meanwhile, he was not the son of the queen, but his status as a male was preferred over a female. Women in the Kubu lineage institution that adheres to a patrilineal system have the potential to end the royal family’s line of power, because children are regarded as not being related to them. A daughter as an heir to the throne is currently faced by the family of the Sultanate of Yogyakarta (Nasional Tempo, 2021). The choice of a male descendant is understood to be related to the issue of leadership and at the same time its continuity among the descendants of the family of a tuan besar.

However, the application of nasab fiqh in the selection of a tuan besar seems to have failed, because the history of succession of the Kubu ruler does not indicate the necessity of a candidate for tuan besar to have the lineage to the previous last king. The history of the kingdom has an unusual tradition of succession. Hasan became the fifth Tuan Besar succeeding his brother.

Meanwhile, Zain became the seventh Tuan Besar replacing his cousin. The son of a tuan besar will not automatically become king, even the sons of Abas and Zain had never taken the throne. Nasab fiqh provides limitations on the criteria for prospective tuan besar, and does not give alternative choices. In fact, the history of the succession in the Kubu kingdom was showed deviation from the tradition of succession to the rules of the kingdom. This was the case in the coronation of Saleh as Tuan Besar VIII. He continued the reign of the previous tuan besar, but was not the son of the sixth or seventh king. The coronation shows the flexibility of nasab fiqh in its previous practice. Saleh’s coronation in the era of regional autonomy set a precedent in the restoration of the kingdom, so that the names of Rafik and Zulfi emerged as kings. However, both of them were rejected by other groups, because their lineage did not meet the criteria.

The application of nasab above in the era of regional autonomy has the potential to be misused for the benefit of placing the throne as an inheritance.

The throne, in the context of lineage, has been perceived as an heirloom. As a result, the heir to the Kubu throne is not one individual. This is understandable

(20)

[ 39 ]

because lineage binds and connects one generation to another and at the same time one family to another, thus forming family clans (Al-Zuḥailī, 1984, p.

7247). The heirloom is viewed as an inheritance belonging to the descendants of the Kubu kingdom. In Islam, material rights are recognized as inheritance (Almausu`atul Fiqhiyah, 1983, p. 208). The throne in history have often been seen as equivalent to material rights. The king through the throne owns the kingdom and all its wealth, so he has the right to use it. Regional autonomy has, to a certain extent, brought the throne of tuan besar back to its past glory.

Certain interests related to the throne arise behind the application of nasab in the restoration of the kingdom.

Regional autonomy gives hope for certain parties in the fight for the throne for the material rights attached to it, such as operational funding assistance from the government. It is widely known that many local kings in carrying out their institutional activities receive hundreds of millions of funding from the Regional Budget every year. The throne at the same time allows the king to play a role as the government’s partner in cultural, social, ceremonial fuctions, and other related matters. This was demonstrated in the governor’s remarks read by the Head of the Social Welfare Bureau of the West Kalimantan Provincial Government during an event in Kubu (West Kalimantan Antaranews, 2015).

The king became a new social elite that could transform into a local political force. His role in the community can be managed to serve as political capital during Regional Head Elections, as in the case of candidates for regent and deputy regent of Kubu Raya, Werry S. and H.M. Nasir M in the 2017 Robok-Robok event organized by certain parties from the Kubu kingdom.

Their picture could be seen on billboards (Delikkalbar, 2017). Material rights related to the throne in that context can give political, social, and economic advantages to certain parties in the fight for the throne of Tuan Besar Kubu.

The application of nasab to a certain extent can be viewed as identity politics of the Kubu kings’ descendants to confirm their blood relation to Tuan besar Aidrus who was a well-known Arab ulema. Identity politics here means building interests within the boundaries of its primordial groups (Anam, 2019). They managed to get the context along with the strengthening role of Arabs in Indonesia. The response of West Kalimantan Muslims to Sheikh Ali Jaber in a number of mosques is an example of those who take a place of honor in society. (Tribun Pontianak, 2016 & Sounds of the Hedgehog, 2018). It is certainly valuable in creating legitimacy of the kingdom. Through identity politics, they have communicated to the public about their position as a legitimate social group to take the royal throne. The future of the kingdom in its restoration is determined by its primordial environment. This seems to

(21)

[ 40 ]

prevent them from leaving their lineage in order to end the fight for the throne.

CONCLUSION

The restoration of the Kubu kingdom, despite the opportunities in the era of regional autonomy, has not materialized due to the fight for the throne. Nasab (lineage) as the fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) of Muslim family ties chosen as a method in the election of Tuan Besar failed to be applied in the restoration because it was practiced for the benefit of the group that triggered conflict with each other. They were trapped in a primordial identity struggle that view the restoration of the kingdom as an internal problem in their community.

They were also so stuck on the lineage instrument that the role of society was neglected. Such context gave rise to a never-ending fight for the throne among the descendants of the king. Several groups, based on their nasab fiqh interpretation, claimed to be entitled to the throne whose power cannot be shared. At that point, the restoration of the kingdom that was offered by regional autonomy to revive local culture was held hostage by the claimants’

predicaments. In turn, the interests regarding the kingdom revival are no longer the focus of attention. They further made it a contestation for the throne. This context puts the local government in a state of uncertainty in the midst of the issues of Kubu.

The nasab fiqh that gave birth to the perception of the royal throne as an heirloom or shared inheritance is assumed to be the reason for certain parties to defend its ownership right. The social, political, and economic advantages that come with the role of tuan besar in society explains such assumption.

Regional autonomy with an interest in the role of the kingdom in local culture has further projected the restoration of the Kubu kingdom as an heirloom as it comes with the material rights. This right emerged through the king’s roles in cultural events supported by the local government as a manifestation of his autonomy. Lineage, in this regard, has become an irreplaceable instrument because of its legitimacy value for the transfer of material rights, not only a matter of kingdom restoration.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Al-Aydrus, S. H. Z. (1932). Tjerita Negeri Kerajaan Koeboe. Tambelan: unpublished Document.

Al-Idroes, S. Z. I. (1919). Surat Pengunduran Diri Tuan Kubu ke VII Sjeirif Zain bin Ismail al-Idroes. Kerta Mulia: unpublished Document.

(22)

[ 41 ]

Al-Zuḥailī, W. (1984). al-Fiqh al-Islāmī wa Adillatuhu, edition of X, 2^nd printing, Damsyik: Dārul Fikr.

Anam, H. F. (2019). “Politik Identitas dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Demokrasi di Indonesia” dalam Politea: Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam, Vol. 2, No.

2.

Anonymous. (1983). al-Mausu`atul Fiqhiyah, 2^nd printing, Kuwait: Wizarah al-Auqaf wa al-Syu’unu al-Islamiyah.

Anonymous. (2002). Surat Kesepakatan Bertiga Ahli Waris Kesultanan Ponti- anak. Pontianak: unpublished Document.

Anonymous. (1924). Surat Tanah Pemerintahan Kerajaan Kubu. Kubu: Do- kumen.

Anonymous. (1969). Silsilah Sultan Usman bin Sultan Abdurrahman al-Qa- dri. Sarawak: unpublished Document.

Arridha, M. T. (2006). “Kitab Maarij al-Lahfan Ila Haqa`iq al-Irfan oleh Sayid Abdurrahman bin Muhammad bin Zayn al-Aydrus” dalam Kesultan- an Melayu Terangganu edt. Rogayah A.H. dan M. Salim. Kuala Lum- pur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Bakar, A. (2020). “Peran Bangsa Hadramaut Dalam Islamisasi di Pantai Barat Kalimantan” hlm. 1-24 dalam Jurnal Dakwah, Vol. 21, No. 1.

(2017). Al-Idroes & Pemerintahan Kerajaan Kubu di Pantai Barat Ka- limantan. Yogyakarta: Magnum.

Budiman, A. (2012) “Otonomi Daerah, Penguatan Politik Identitas dan Pen- garuhnya Terhadap Integrasi Nasional” dalam Sawala: Jurnal Admin- istrasi Negara, Vol. 1, No. 1.

Djunaydi, S. M. (2001). Membuka Tirai Kerajaan Kubu dan Ambawang. Pon- tianak: Tidak diterbitkan. (2015). Kerajaan Kubu: Tanggapan Terha- dap Pelanggaran Islah dalam Pelantikan Raja Kerajaan Kubu Kaliman- tan Barat. Pontianak: unpublished Document .

Ema. (2017). “Kerajaan Mempawah Pada Masa Opu Daeng Manambon Ta- hun 1737-1761 di Kabupaten Pontianak, p. 18 dalam Sosioedukasi, Vol. 6 No. 1.

Enthoven, J.J.K. (1902). Brijdragen Tot De Geographie van Borneos Wester Af- deeling Deel II. Leiden: D.J. Brill.

Dewall, H. (1862) “Matan, Simpang, Soekadana, de Karimata-Einlanden en Koeboe: Wester-Adeeling van Borneo” dalam Tijdschrift voor In- dische Taal, Land, En Volkenkunde Uitgeoven Door Het Bataviaasch

(23)

[ 42 ]

Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Deel XI, edt. J.A. van der Chijs. Batavia: Lange & Co.

Husin, S. Y. (1977). Kilas Balik Ex. Bestuurscommissie Kerajaan Kubu: Kisah Dan Pembahasan Kembali Mengenai Sejarah Hukum Adat dan Adat Istiadat Kalimantan Barat (1975) Antara Dua Mantan Anggota Majelis Kerajaan Kubu. Pontianak: unpublished Document.

Kamaruzzaman. (2008). Surat Pernyataan Pewaris Kerajaan. Pontianak: unpublished Document.

Lontaan, J. O. (1975). Sejarah Hukum Adat dan Adat Istiadat Kalimantan Barat. Pontianak: Pemda Kalbar.

Mahrus, E. (2012). “The Development of Islam in The Kubu Kingdom (1768- 1944)” dalam Albab: Borneo Journal Religious Studies, p. 77-91, Vol., 1, No. 1.

Natsir, M. (2013). Paradje Sebagai Budaya dan Ritual Melayu Sanggau. Sang- gau: Dinas Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata Kab. Sanggau.

Nurcahyani, L. dkk. (2008). Syarif Hasan Bin Zein Al Idrus, Pontianak: De- partemen Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata Balai Pelestarian Sejarah dan Nilai Tradisional Pontianak.

Pandil, S. dkk. (1985). Upacara Tradisional Yang Berkaitan dengan Peristiwa Alam dan Kepercayaan Daerah Kalimantan Barat. Pontianak: Depdik- bud Kalbar.

Prabandan, H. W. (2011). “Pembangunan Hukum Berbasish Kearifan Lokal”

p. 29-33 dalam Majalah Perencana Bappenas, Edisi 01/Thn. XVII.

Rasyid, R. (2005). “Otonomi Daerah: Latar Belakang dan Masa Depannya”

dalam Desentralisasi dan Otonomi Daerah edt. Syamsuddin Haris. Ja- karta: LIPI.

Risa. (2014). “Islam di Kerajaan Sambas Antara Abad XV-XVII Studi Awal tentang Islamisasi di Sambas, hlm. 108-110 dalam Khatulistiwa-Jour- nal of Islamic Studies, Vol. 4 No. 2.

Soekanto, S. (2000). Sosiologi: Suatu Pengantar. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persa- da.

Sya`rāwi, M. M. (1991). Tafsīr Sya`rāwī, Mesir: Dār Akhbar al-Yaum.

(24)

[ 43 ]

Online Mass Media

Andilala. Syarif Rafik Dinobatkan Sebagai Raja Kubu, (2015, 11 Januari) retrieved from https://www.antaranews.com/berita/473417/syarif-rafik-dinobatkan-sebagai-raja-kubu.

Iwan. Syarif Syahril Alaydrus Dinobatkan Menjadi Raja Kubu Dengan Gelar Tuan Besar Raja Kubu, (2017, 27 Agustus). Accessed from https://www.

kompasiana.com/jurnalwicaksana/59a279d2a25c5f6801308922/syarif-syahril-alaydrus-dinobatkan-menjadi-raja-kubu-dengan-gelar-tuan-besar-raja-kubu?page=all.

Izar. Festival Budaya Paradje Ke-11 Resmi Dibuka, Ini Pesan Wagub Provin- si Kalimantan Barat, (2019, 18 September). Accessed from https://

diskominfo.sanggau.go.id/baca/18-09-2019/festival-budaya-paradje-ke-11-resmi-dibuka-ini-pesan-wagub-provinsi-kalimantan-barat Khusyairi, M. Bupati: Paradje Pasaka Jadi Program Kunjungan Wisata, (2015,

7 September). Accessed from https://kalbar.antaranews.com/berita/335847/bupati-paradje-pasaka-jadi-program-kunjungan-wisata.

Madrosid. Rusman Ali: Kerajaan Kubu Aset Masyarakat Kalbar, (2017, 20 Agus- tus) accessed from https://pontianak.tribunnews.com/2017/08/20/

rusman-alikerajaan-kubu-aset-masyarakat-kalbar.

Hadiri Dua Penobatan Dualisme Raja Kubu, Ini Pesan Bupati Rusman Ali, (2017, 28 Agustus) Accessed from https://pontianak.tribunnews.

com/2017/08/28/hadiri-dua-penobatan-dualisme-raja-kubu-ini-pesan-bupati-rusman-ali.

Mahardika, R. Syekh Ali Jaber Beri Tausyiah, Ini Pesannya Untuk Warga Lan- dak, (2018, 22 September). Accessed from https://www.suaralandak.

co.id/2018/09/syeh-ali-jaber-beri-tausyiah-ini.html.

Oxtora, Rendra. Pemprov Harapkan Peran Kerajaan, (2015, 26 April) Accessed from https://kalbar.antaranews.com/berita/332755/pemprov-harapkan-peran-kerajaan-dalam-pengembangan-kebudayaan.

SP. Tuan Besar dan Raja Kubu Resmi Dinobatkan, (2017, 29 Agustus). Ac- cessed from https://www.suarapemredkalbar.com/read/advertori- al/29082017/tuan-besar-dan-raja-kubu-resmi-dinobatkan.

Tim D. Warga Desa Kubu Peringati Robo-Robo, (2017, 15 November). Ac- cessed from https://delikkalbar.com/2017/11/15/warga-desa-kubu-peringati-robo-robo

(25)

[ 44 ]

Wicaksono, P. Adik Tiri Sultan Hb X Bilang Nasib Keraton Yogyakarta Ter- gantung Nasab dan Nasib, (2021, 24 Januari). Accessed from https://

nasional.tempo.co/read/1426074/adik-tiri-sultan-hb-x-bilang-nasib-keraton-yogyakarta-tergantung-nasab-dan-nasib.

Yonavilbia, E. Kerajaan Kubu Bakal Gelar Penobatan Tuan Besar, (2017, 9 Agustus). Accessed from http://infopublik.id/kategori/nusan- tara/215830/kerajaan-kubu-bakal-gelar-penobatan-tuan-besar?show.

Viduka, A. (Foto-Foto) Ribuan Ummat Khusyuk Dengar Ceramah Syekh Ali Jaber di Masjid Raya Mujahidin Pontianak, (2016, 12 September). Ac- cessed from https://pontianak.tribunnews.com/2016/09/12/foto-fo- to-ribuan-umat-khusyuk-dengar-ceramah-syekh-ali-jaber-di-masjid-raya-mujahidin-pontianak